Johnson v. Quander’s Empirical Analysis
440 F.3d 489 · 2006
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 8 district · 23 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Schmerber v. State of California · Mincey v. Arizona · Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Pennsylvania v. Mimms
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“genetic fingerprints differ somewhat from their metacarpal brethren”); United States v. Kincade, 379 F.3d 813 , 841-42 & n. 3 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc) (Gould, J., concurring) (”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an intolerable burden” on law enforcement “if every 'search' of an ordinary fingerprint database were subject to Fourth Amendment challenges.” Id. at 499 . 11 . Konzak’s declaration actually states that there was a 74% increase overall in DNA matches over the course of the program,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Haskell v. Brown · Haskell v. Brown“accessing the records stored in the CODIS database is not a 'search' for Fourth Amendment purposes,” because”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.